Poor JK Rowling, she has not failed us, she has failed herself.
If she wanted Dumbledore’s character to be either homosexual or heterosexual, there needs to be a little more of something in the texts to support it. If she was hoping to make some kind of great point of social commentary with this recently released news, she has failed horribly. As a person, we all well know that I couldn’t care less what the Headmaster’s (heehee) sexuality is but as a former English Major (that was a lifetime ago!) I cannot disregard the lack of facts supporting either direction and so Dumbledore’s sexuality remains nothing but hearsay to me. And I like the fact that he is an enigma. Loose ends are ok by me.
The news here.
Brings a whole new meaning to the term magic satchel.
“We’re not saying the signs were completely obvious, but a little effort could have easily unscrambled “Albus Dumbledore” to read “Male bods rule, bud!” – from http://flixer.com/
I wanted to put comparison links to a “sexy male wizard” and “ sexy female wizard” but I won’t even tell you what the first few pages of Google results are like when you enter in “sexy gay male wizard costume”!
Oh, and don’t forget to get your shirt “to celebrate your inability to turn off your gaydar while reading a children’s book.”
I put on my robe and wizard hat…
Entries (RSS)
so, from the article on this “outing” (which is likely a simplification of the actual discussion since this is a CNN report), JK was asked if Dumbledore would find true love and she replies “He’s gay”. Other than getting her books back in the headlines, and possibly tapping in to the gay demographic for even more sales, what does that have to do with anything? Is she implying the two are mutually exclusive?
This has publicity stunt written all over it. I suspect she either had the question planted, or simply seized the opportunity to create much ado about nothing.
For another author’s perspective, I read an interesting commentary by Neil Gaiman on this “news story” in his blog. http://www.neilgaiman.com/journal/2007/10/flowers-of-romance.html